Game Politics ([info]gamepolitics) wrote,
@ 2006-02-03 15:53:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Entry tags:discrimination, gay, glbt, lamba, lesbian, wow

Discrimination Against Gays in WoW? An Analysis

Can a group be punished for inciting harassment against themselves? Blizzard, publisher of the ultra-popular MMO World of Warcraft, seems to think so.

Recently, gay-oriented news site In Newsweekly noted that a gay & lesbian friendly guild on WoW had been warned by Blizzard not to violate their harassment policy. Sara Andrews had been sending in-game chat messages in order to recruit players into OZ, her "GLBT friendly" guild (gay, lesbian, bisexual & transgender). WoW players messaged by Sarah received the following: "OZ is recruiting all levels | We are not 'GLBT only,' but we are 'GLBT friendly'! (guilduniverse.com/oz)"

Sarah subsequently received an email from Blizzard which cited her for "Harassment - Sexual Orientation" under Blizzard's "Terms of Use". When Sara queried a Blizzard GM about the citation, she was told "While we appreciate and understand your point of view, we do feel that the advertisement of a 'GLBT friendly' guild is very likely to result in harassment for players that may not have existed otherwise."

In the "Terms of Use", "Harassment - Sexual Orientation" "includes both clear and masked language which insultingly refers to any aspect of sexual orientation pertaining to themselves or other players." How advertising a "GLBT friendly" guild is "insulting" is something that Blizzard did not make clear to Sarah Andrews. In response to one email, Blizzard wrote "Many people are insulted just at the word 'homosexual' or any other word referring to sexual orientation" and even suggested that the guild was discriminating against non-gays.

The response, posted on WoW's forums, sparked outrage & debate (and over 2,500 posts about the subject), and many accused Blizzard of being "anti-gay". There was even an in-game protest where players tried to block a marriage ceremony because the participants were "flaunting their heterosexuality".

Blizzard eventually posted it's official response, which was also reprinted on In Newsweekly:

"Topics related to sensitive real-world subjects - such as religious, sexual, or political preference, for example - have had a tendency to result in communication between players that often breaks down into harassment. To promote a positive game environment for everyone and help prevent such harassment from taking place as best we can, we prohibit mention of topics related to sensitive real-world subjects in open chat within the game, and we do our best to take action whenever we see such topics being broadcast."

Blizzard has also vowed to re-write several sections of the "Terms of Use" to clarify their position, as well as update their enforcement policy with GMs.

But this did little to quell the controversy, and may actually have fanned the flames. Members of Stonewall Champions and The Spreading Taint, both GLBT-friendly guilds, sent a letter to Blizzard expressing their displeasure at the policy: "Of particular concern to us is that the policy in practice punishes players for hypothetical harassment at the hands of another... Rules should exist to punish the harasser, not those who may be harassed."

Yesterday, Kotaku noted that the Lambda Legal Defense Fund, a legal firm dedicated to protecting gay & lesbian civil rights, announced they were looking into the case. Under California law (where Blizzard is located), businesses cannot
discriminate based on sexual orientation.

J: This has inarguably gotten out of hand, and while I can see Blizzard's concern that certain topics do result in flame-wars, this was clearly a case of over-reaction on their part. The policies are supposed to protect players from harassment, not punish those who identify themselves as belonging to a certain group. Especially when that concern is based on harassment that "might" happen.

-Jabrwock




Page 1 of 3
<<[1] [2] [3] >>

(319 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Awkward
[info]grimm24
2006-02-03 09:18 pm UTC (link)
Im not for or against this, it seems kind of silly that Blizzard would make such a big deal over this but at the same time you can tell that Blizzard is only trying to keep the rules intact. It will be interesting to see how this turns out

(Reply to this)

Oh god this has spread here?
[info]oldmankeebler
2006-02-03 09:19 pm UTC (link)
It simple, you should not saying who you choose to sleep with in a guild advertisement. Its not a question of gay people aren't allowed to advertise their sexual orientation. NO ONE IS ALLOWED TO ADVERTISE THERE GUILD USING THEIR SEXUAL ORIENTION. You won't see "straight friendly" advertisement. Its a family based game with people of all ages playing, You don't need to know who I'm sleeping with and I sure don't need to know who your sleeping with.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Oh god this has spread here?
[info]jabrwock
2006-02-03 09:25 pm UTC (link)
It simple, you should not saying who you choose to sleep with in a guild advertisement.

Yet they allow in-game marriages. Do you see why the charge of discrimination is being made?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]pope_guilty, 2006-02-03 09:30 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]jabrwock, 2006-02-03 09:32 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]pope_guilty, 2006-02-03 09:34 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]keddren, 2006-02-03 09:43 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]jabrwock, 2006-02-03 09:48 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]keddren, 2006-02-03 09:53 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]oldmankeebler, 2006-02-03 09:33 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]pope_guilty, 2006-02-03 09:35 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]oldmankeebler, 2006-02-03 09:41 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]jabrwock, 2006-02-03 09:45 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]the1jeffy, 2006-02-03 09:50 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]oldmankeebler, 2006-02-03 09:51 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]jabrwock, 2006-02-03 09:55 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]hexrei, 2006-02-03 10:53 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]sylvan, 2006-02-05 06:24 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]jakethejuggalo, 2006-02-03 09:39 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]jabrwock, 2006-02-03 09:43 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]jakethejuggalo, 2006-02-03 09:53 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]persephoneflame, 2006-02-03 10:01 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]jakethejuggalo, 2006-02-03 10:05 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]persephoneflame, 2006-02-03 10:12 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]jakethejuggalo, 2006-02-03 10:14 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]jakethejuggalo, 2006-02-03 10:06 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]oldmankeebler, 2006-02-03 09:44 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]keddren, 2006-02-03 09:44 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]jakethejuggalo, 2006-02-03 09:49 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]oldmankeebler, 2006-02-03 09:50 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]jakethejuggalo, 2006-02-03 09:53 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]keddren, 2006-02-03 09:54 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]persephoneflame, 2006-02-03 09:32 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]pope_guilty, 2006-02-03 09:36 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]oldmankeebler, 2006-02-03 09:49 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]persephoneflame, 2006-02-03 09:57 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]kingnat, 2006-02-04 12:27 am UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]aniki21, 2006-02-04 09:46 pm UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]dutch_gamer, 2006-02-03 10:45 pm UTC
WOW, this has got to be a record!! - [info]funnydale, 2006-02-04 12:19 am UTC
Re: WOW, this has got to be a record!! - [info]markusdragon, 2006-02-04 10:49 am UTC
Re: Oh god this has spread here? - [info]jeremykpierce, 2006-02-05 05:59 am UTC

[info]howdoyouplead
2006-02-03 09:21 pm UTC (link)
There's a GLBT guild called "The Spreading Taint?" That is so funny.

But anyway, Blizzard must've not thought that hard about this before they reacted. Maybe they should be working to fix the problems that DO EXIST in the game, like goldfarming.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]jabrwock
2006-02-03 09:27 pm UTC (link)
Maybe they should be working to fix the problems that DO EXIST in the game, like goldfarming.

Maybe they should take some queues from Square-Enix. Apparently 90% of their gilfarmers dropped off the face of the earth last week... Maybe it was ninjas...

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]keddren, 2006-02-03 09:30 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]lordlundar, 2006-02-04 03:04 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]iceph03nix, 2006-02-04 09:55 am UTC

[info]keddren
2006-02-03 09:25 pm UTC (link)
"businesses cannot discriminate based on sexual orientation."

That's a very broad wording of the law. That phrase refers to business practices such as hiring and employee advancement/punitive measures and really doesn't apply in this case. Blizzard is upholding its TOS, basically telling the OZ that they're welcome to advertise their GLBT-friendly guild on the game forums but not over in-game general chat.

They didn't tell them in the best way. Providing the policy in question as they did they're approaching the issue from a "burn the village to save it" sort of way.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]jabrwock
2006-02-03 09:29 pm UTC (link)
Blizzard is upholding its TOS, basically telling the OZ that they're welcome to advertise their GLBT-friendly guild on the game forums but not over in-game general chat.

Except if you read their TOS, it doesn't say you CAN'T reveal your sexual orientation, just that you can't do it in an INSULTING way... *confused*

That phrase refers to business practices such as hiring and employee advancement/punitive measures and really doesn't apply in this case.

I suppose it would depend on the wording of the law. If it applies to who the business does business with, then it would apply. But yeah, most places it just applies to hiring practices & internal matters...

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]keddren, 2006-02-03 09:38 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kingnat, 2006-02-04 12:30 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]iceph03nix, 2006-02-04 10:00 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]kingnat, 2006-02-04 01:00 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tablesaw, 2006-02-03 10:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]keddren, 2006-02-03 10:08 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tablesaw, 2006-02-03 10:41 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kingnat, 2006-02-04 01:10 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]voyager640, 2006-02-05 03:32 am UTC
HAH! - [info]bustermanzero, 2006-02-03 11:38 pm UTC

[info]keddren
2006-02-03 09:29 pm UTC (link)
"The response, posted on WoW's forums, sparked outrage & debate (and over 2,500 posts about the subject), and many accused Blizzard of being "anti-gay". There was even an in-game protest where players tried to block a marriage ceremony because the participants were "flaunting their heterosexuality".

Sorry for the double post, but I missed this part on my first read through.

That's just fundamentally stupid. You don't go ruining someone else's experience because you're unhappy with something Blizzard did/is doing. It's my sincere hope that everyone involved in that protest got a temp ban.

(Reply to this)


[info]jythie
2006-02-03 09:31 pm UTC (link)
(disclaimer - I am not a WoW player so I can't see most of these argument dirrectly, but have been following the fallout outside thier servers, so my data is somewhat second hand)

I think one of the biggest things I've seen fanning this flame is the feeling that blizzard _does_ turn a blind eye to other "Topics related to sensitive real-world subjects - such as religious, sexual, or political preference" in thier channels, for instance evangelical christians prosthletizing in the public areas, and generally ignored anti-gay slurs.

So there was a feeling of 'well, the minority (thus small $$) can't try to recruit for themselves, but large (paying) groups get leaway to break the rules.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]ex_klin500
2006-02-03 10:21 pm UTC (link)
I think this is a PRIME example of what is going on here, and I'm surprised it hasn't been covered.

There are many Christian groups out there and while I'm not Christian (nor am I anti-Christian), I feel that if these people are allowed to recruit Christians, as well as evangelize inside of the game, why can't the GLBT community create a GLBT friendly guild.

The game already has a lot of people using the word "Fag" or a regular basis... you don't see people getting disciplined for that.

If Blizzard is going to enforce the rule this way (which is their perogative), they need to apply it evenly to all groups, not just GLBT. Religious (be it Christian, Buddhist, or Wicca), Political (Republican, Democrat, or Green), or Sexual (Homosexual, Sex-Positive, Marriages).

Also, they need to change the wording from "such as religious, sexual, or political preference" to "such as religious, sexual, or political," sexuality isn't a preference.

/gets off soap box

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Well, here's the thing - [info]gnomicide, 2006-02-04 05:08 am UTC
Re: Well, here's the thing - [info]murdercrow, 2006-02-04 05:48 am UTC
Re: Well, here's the thing - [info]aehallh, 2006-02-04 03:49 pm UTC
Re: Well, here's the thing - [info]aniki21, 2006-02-04 09:49 pm UTC
Re: Well, here's the thing - [info]kildorn, 2006-02-05 07:00 am UTC

[info]revengeofthezio
2006-02-03 09:31 pm UTC (link)
I think Blizzard made the right choice, just the wrong explanation for it. I am willing to be if they made a guild for "straight friendly" people, it would be shut down without a peep. Gotta treat all of these types of guilds equally.

I play games, watch movies and read fictional books to ESCAPE from real life issues for awhile, not to hear a bunch of advertisements for guilds that are down with the 'mos, which will eventually spark a debate on if gay marriage is okay.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]jabrwock
2006-02-03 09:34 pm UTC (link)
I think Blizzard made the right choice

I think it was their reaction to it that sparked most of the outrage. That and they were trying to justify it using a TOS that didn't cover this kind of situation. So it seemed like they were making up rules on the spot to justify a heavy-handed GM...

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(no subject) - [info]kingnat, 2006-02-04 12:33 am UTC
BZZZZZZZZZT! - [info]hardhead_7, 2006-02-04 12:12 pm UTC
Re: BZZZZZZZZZT! - [info]silver_derstin, 2006-02-04 02:15 pm UTC
Re: BZZZZZZZZZT! - [info]keddren, 2006-02-04 05:50 pm UTC
Re: BZZZZZZZZZT! - [info]kildorn, 2006-02-05 07:03 am UTC
Three hands!
[info]jbourrie
2006-02-03 09:32 pm UTC (link)
On one hand, there is not sexual orientation necessary in WoW.

On the other hand, Blizzard made a bigger deal of it then necessary.

On that mysterious third hand, one of the guilds is called THE SPREADING TAINT! And they're trying to be taken seriously!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Three hands!
[info]howdoyouplead
2006-02-03 09:40 pm UTC (link)
That name made me giggle too.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Three hands! - [info]pope_guilty, 2006-02-03 09:46 pm UTC
While I don't agree with all that stuff
[info]pixelante_ninja
2006-02-03 09:40 pm UTC (link)
I do think they overreacted greatly and should just let them do their guild.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: While I don't agree with all that stuff
[info]keddren
2006-02-03 09:46 pm UTC (link)
Blizzar is letting them do their guild.

The guild has not been disbanded or sanctioned against in any way. They were told not to refer to sexual orientation while advertising over general chat.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: While I don't agree with all that stuff - [info]jabrwock, 2006-02-03 09:52 pm UTC
Re: While I don't agree with all that stuff - [info]keddren, 2006-02-03 09:57 pm UTC
Re: While I don't agree with all that stuff - [info]pixelante_ninja, 2006-02-03 10:58 pm UTC
Re: While I don't agree with all that stuff - [info]kildorn, 2006-02-05 07:05 am UTC

[info]jakethejuggalo
2006-02-03 09:46 pm UTC (link)
i think blizzard made the right decision. this guild would have gotten a ton of harrassment from other players. penny-arcade said it best.

(Reply to this)


[info]otaku_cat
2006-02-03 09:52 pm UTC (link)
I can see Blizzard's point right from the start, rather readily. Unfortunately, you're playing a game populated by a large variety of people, young and old, in all levels of (im)maturity. Advertising a guild who's focal point is a tolerance for Gays strikes me as the equivalent of painting a giant, shiny bullseye on your back.

Note, I fully support people's sexual orientation. My mother and aunt are both gay, and are among the coolest people on this planet. But come on, Bliz is just telling you what should be already common sense. The game is full of immature kids, and you're just going to create harassment and problems for yourself if you advertise your guild based on that focus. There's a difference between having rights and having discretion. I don't imagine most gay people would walk around screaming they're gay all day, would they? Isn't this something people typically keep as part of their private lives?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]pope_guilty
2006-02-03 09:53 pm UTC (link)
Your icon for all the wins.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]otaku_cat, 2006-02-03 10:01 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]persephoneflame, 2006-02-03 10:07 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]gray17, 2006-02-03 11:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]dark_aphelion, 2006-02-03 10:35 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]otaku_cat, 2006-02-03 10:45 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tstoneman, 2006-02-04 01:52 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]keddren, 2006-02-04 05:04 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]keddren, 2006-02-04 05:07 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]trooper6, 2006-02-05 02:38 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]keddren, 2006-02-05 05:00 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]trooper6, 2006-02-05 06:21 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]keddren, 2006-02-05 06:47 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]otaku_cat, 2006-02-04 05:44 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]aniki21, 2006-02-04 09:51 pm UTC

[info]the1jeffy
2006-02-03 09:53 pm UTC (link)
Also, Blizzard has stated that they will be re-writing their ToS to make it clearer and avoid this kind of confusion in the future.

I am looking for Caydiem's post now.


(Reply to this)


[info]twistserve
2006-02-03 09:55 pm UTC (link)
I think this is a slightly bigger matter than just sexual orientation. If you're going to allow one type of guild to form around a shared ideology (religion), you have to be willing to allow guilds to form around any non-hate ideology. Whether it's GLBT or Christian or Buddhist or multi-cultural equality, it's either all or nothing. Blizzard can't consider one to be harassment and the other not. It just makes no sense.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]gray17
2006-02-04 12:05 am UTC (link)
There's nothing wrong with the Guild's existance. Blizzard hasn't disbanded them or anything. What Blizzard's complaining about is them advertising in the chat window instead of on the forum. They're just doing so with really ridiculous reasoning and heavy handedness.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]twistserve, 2006-02-04 12:07 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]gray17, 2006-02-04 12:47 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]murdercrow, 2006-02-04 06:03 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]gray17, 2006-02-04 06:23 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]mendror, 2006-02-05 11:04 pm UTC
Blizzard Official response.
[info]the1jeffy
2006-02-03 09:55 pm UTC (link)
Apologies for the length of time it took to get this information out to you.

We encourage community building among our players with others of similar interests, and we understand that guilds are one of the primary ways to forge these communities. However, topics related to sensitive real-world subjects -- such as religious, sexual, or political preference, for example -- have had a tendency to result in communication between players that often breaks down into harassment.

To promote a positive game environment for everyone and help prevent such harassment from taking place as best we can, we prohibit mention of topics related to sensitive real-world subjects in open chat within the game, and we do our best to take action whenever we see such topics being broadcast. This includes openly advertising a guild friendly to players based on a particular political, sexual, or religious preference, to list a few examples. For guilds that wish to use such topics as part of their recruiting efforts, our Guild Recruitment forum, located at our community Web site, serves as one open avenue for doing so.

We will be clarifying some of the language in our game policies in order to help avoid such confusion in the future.

Caydiem WoW Comunity Manager

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=6845080&s=blizzard&tmp=1#blizzard

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Blizzard Official response.
[info]keddren
2006-02-03 10:00 pm UTC (link)
Thanks, Jeff, I was actually looking for that very post.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Not attacking you, the1jeffy, but I'm just really wondering... - [info]xiiiwulf, 2006-02-03 10:40 pm UTC
Re: Not attacking you, the1jeffy, but I'm just really wondering... - [info]gnomicide, 2006-02-04 01:46 pm UTC
Re: Not attacking you, the1jeffy, but I'm just really wondering... - [info]the1jeffy, 2006-02-06 01:30 pm UTC
Re: Not attacking you, the1jeffy, but I'm just really wondering... - [info]xiiiwulf, 2006-02-06 08:56 pm UTC
Re: Not attacking you, the1jeffy, but I'm just really wondering... - [info]the1jeffy, 2006-02-06 09:57 pm UTC
Re: Not attacking you, the1jeffy, but I'm just really wondering... - [info]xiiiwulf, 2006-02-06 10:13 pm UTC
Re: Not attacking you, the1jeffy, but I'm just really wondering... - [info]the1jeffy, 2006-02-07 12:37 am UTC
Re: Not attacking you, the1jeffy, but I'm just really wondering... - [info]xiiiwulf, 2006-02-07 01:54 am UTC

[info]twistedsilence
2006-02-03 10:00 pm UTC (link)
It was probably the actions of one GM whose decision snowballed into something bigger than anyone intended it to be. Anyone who plays WoW knows how incongruent the GM's interpretations of the ToS can be. One thing is clearly an exploit to one, while it's clearly permissible to another.

In any event, whispering random people asking them to join a gay-friendly guild is just asking for trouble. General chat on their server must be barrels of fun.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]jabrwock
2006-02-03 10:09 pm UTC (link)
It was probably the actions of one GM whose decision snowballed into something bigger than anyone intended it to be.

That's my guess. And Blizzard has to back up their GMs, or else who'd listen to them? I think they just got backed into a corner and don't know what to do.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]tigerknight
2006-02-03 10:01 pm UTC (link)
I support someone wanting to create a GLBT friendly guild, but they should have thoroughly read the terms ahead of time.

As a result, I fully support blizzard asking them to stop advertising the way they are. You can be GLBT friendly without blatantly stating your orientation - which is something the two other guilds referenced have done without a problem.

Any lawsuit of 'discriminating against sexuality' is going to fall flat for a number of reasons - first off being that they have not suspended any accounts based on sexual orientation, second because there are other groups that do just fine under the 'discriminatory' practices and haven't taken up arms. The fact that blizzard's response itself caused a bit of flames from people who choose to disobey the rules and get pissy when they're called on it is not enough to warrant a lawsuit.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]jabrwock
2006-02-03 10:07 pm UTC (link)
I support someone wanting to create a GLBT friendly guild, but they should have thoroughly read the terms ahead of time.

But the terms weren't clear, so reading them ahead of time wouldn't help. Which is why Blizzard is re-writting them...

You can be GLBT friendly without blatantly stating your orientation

Unless you know what "Taint" means... Then it's blatantly obvious what their orientation is...

Any lawsuit of 'discriminating against sexuality' is going to fall flat for a number of reasons

They're not suing yet, what they are doing is looking into whether Blizzard's policies are discriminatory. Had she kept advertising her guild after getting cited, she could have had her account suspended (its' the next step after a harassement citation).

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]tigerknight, 2006-02-03 10:27 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]xiiiwulf, 2006-02-03 10:32 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tigerknight, 2006-02-03 10:43 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]xiiiwulf, 2006-02-03 10:47 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tigerknight, 2006-02-03 10:56 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]xiiiwulf, 2006-02-04 12:07 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]xiiiwulf, 2006-02-04 12:08 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]tigerknight, 2006-02-04 04:44 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]jabrwock, 2006-02-03 10:48 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tigerknight, 2006-02-03 10:54 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tstoneman, 2006-02-04 01:55 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]tigerknight, 2006-02-04 04:46 am UTC
No GBLT Guilds AND no 'same-sex' marriage?
[info]vortexala
2006-02-03 10:04 pm UTC (link)
Seen at Kotaku:
http://brewergnome.livejournal.com/186819.html

"[GM] Once again, while it does have good intentions other players may take offense to it

[Sylveri] So if, for example they wanted to have an in game wedding, as many heterosexual couples do.

[GM] Could be reported

[Sylveri] Anything can be reported, would they be warned or suspended?

[GM] Yes if you review our policies it would be under Sexual Orientation

[Sylveri] So there’s no reference to sexual orientation ever, unless it’s heterosexual?

[GM] Once again, while you may not think there is no reference, other players on the realm might think there is

[Sylveri] Reference to what? Marriage?

[GM] Yes, two females getting married

[Sylveri] But who defines what’s “offensive?”

[GM] Our policies will state that"

Bit much there, methinks...

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: No GBLT Guilds AND no 'same-sex' marriage?
[info]vortexala
2006-02-03 10:07 pm UTC (link)
Whoops, the Kotaku link is here
That leads to the first link above.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: No GBLT Guilds AND no 'same-sex' marriage? - [info]kajex, 2006-02-04 05:13 am UTC
Correction - [info]bustermanzero, 2006-02-04 07:05 am UTC
Re: Correction - [info]kajex, 2006-02-04 09:47 am UTC

[info]xiiiwulf
2006-02-03 10:06 pm UTC (link)
Here in my college a Black Student Union was being set up.

Someone took down all their posters, and later put them back in place.

The new posters had red ink scrwaled across them.

"Black Student Union, interset meeting - ISN'T THIS RACISM?"

It's not racist, or discriminatory unless specifically stated that it is for a certain group and only that group. This story is ridiculous and to protest I'm cnaceling all my gaming sessions that involve Blizzard's games. I refuse to give them any more of my money until this is resolved - correctly.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]mendror
2006-02-05 11:07 pm UTC (link)
and acting like a baby because they where given a warning saying not to advertise on general is any more better. Fine go ahead, stop playing, means one less person to fight over my epic wrath set for.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]xiiiwulf, 2006-02-05 11:36 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mendror, 2006-02-07 02:23 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]xiiiwulf, 2006-02-07 03:55 am UTC

[info]omg_its_rob
2006-02-03 10:09 pm UTC (link)
this subject came up on our latest podcast (OLR) to which we talked about at some length. i'm a gay gaymer myself... i totally understand why people seek out GLBT guilds, and have been in a couple myself back when i played FFXI... i didn't really have a problem with what was going on here at first, i viewed the whole thing to be an over-reaction on all parts... i think blizzard was wrong in responding that it was their "sexual harassment" policy... if they wanted to warn her they should have done it for spam or something more relevant to the policy they are quoting but the problem is that word "harassment"... she was not harassing anyone (unless you consider spam to be harassment but even that would certianly not be sexual)...

this post is absolutley right on that blizzard's response basically fanned the flames. they say that sexual orientation and things of these nature have no place in the general chat in game. well there's an inconsistency here... you can type /silly on a male tauren and it will say "Homoginized? No way, I like the ladies." OK look, i'm not GLAAD or anything, that joke is cute and doesn't offend me in the least by itself... put it in *this* context though, and i think blizzard looks very hypocritical right now.

i'd feel much better about this whole thing if blizzard would come out and more clearly say "look, we made a mistake here and should not have warned her under sexual harasssment"... and then review some of these policies they have in place. i'm no longer an FFXI player but my time there was great... never ran into attitude problems or harassment at all... the servers didn't suddenly blow up with hate when people shouted for guild recruiting. i'm told it's because FFXI has a more mature fan base... well that's a contreversial subject, really and i don't know what's right there but maybe blizzard's expectation on the maturity of their players ought to be higher. if they don't want glbt guilds being advertised because of the harassment it might cause... shouldn't swift action be taken against the harassers?

(Reply to this)


[info]markusdragon
2006-02-03 10:15 pm UTC (link)
UR GAY, LOL! - Blizzard doesn't bat an eyelid.
Join my LGBT friendly guild! - Blocked pretty damn sharpish.

Hmmm... I can see where the problem lies...

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]jakethejuggalo
2006-02-03 10:17 pm UTC (link)
i have personally seen GMs contact people for comments like that on numerous occasions. it just never gets any publicity because it's supposed to happen.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(no subject) - [info]keddren, 2006-02-03 10:21 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kingnat, 2006-02-04 01:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]keddren, 2006-02-04 05:52 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kingnat, 2006-02-04 06:58 pm UTC
Well - [info]gnomicide, 2006-02-04 01:50 pm UTC

[info]xiiiwulf
2006-02-03 10:24 pm UTC (link)
As another point, seeing as they attract GLBT AND straight, who's to ACTUALLY know wht you orientation is? And quite frankly, if it incites harassment then maybe, just maybe, they ought to be looking there instead. (Which I know has been stated more than once but needs to be continuosly re-stated so it's made clear what's desired by the people who actually play the game.)

(Reply to this)

I guess I'll post my take as well
[info]blitzfitness
2006-02-03 10:33 pm UTC (link)
I'm open minded and don't care about peoples sexual orientation. When I think of WoW or just about any other MMO in conjunction with this debate, I think the following thoughts:

A) Before reading this article and the hullabaloo (good word) about this issue, I would never have known what GLBT meant. And guess what, now that I do, I still don't care.
B) They aren't actually stating a sexual orientation. They instead are 'massing' different orientations.
C) Aren't they also fine with guilds creating christian guilds, etc? Why is this different?
D) Guilds are a large part of MMO's. Doesn't restricting the advertisement of a guild hurt the fun factor to the game?
E) If were talking about being offended here, I'd like to state that I am tired of people thinking I love my liqour because I'm Irish and Scottish. That's a stereotype that I don't condone.
F) There is banning on this? THIS?!?! Yet there are gold farming operations all over and some people deserve to be banned just on their characters name alone. How many "Cloud" or "Sephiroth" variations are there on FFXI. How many "The Ones" or "NEO" are on Matrix MMO. And how many names are along the lines of "Supah Killah". Is advertising for an amazing killer not offensive? It offends my senses. Why aren't they banned?
G) How many of these PR people are going to keep their job after this? I think and hope the number will be low.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: I guess I'll post my take as well
[info]dutch_gamer
2006-02-03 11:09 pm UTC (link)
I just want to mention that nobody got banned over this. Sara Andrews the person in charge of this guild only got a warning, nothing more. So she was/is still able to play.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: I guess I'll post my take as well - [info]blitzfitness, 2006-02-03 11:14 pm UTC
This is funny and Sad at the same time...
[info]greatoak
2006-02-03 10:34 pm UTC (link)
Funny that people would bring this kind of issue into a game where people are PRETENDING to be something else (in most cases). I almost thought it was an early April Fool's joke till I read the articles... I mean a game that allows for role playing but then decides "certain" role playing is not appropriate? Give me a BREAK!!!

SAD because this issue has infiltrated the the game industry.

Violence is one thing... I mean stuff that you see in other games that is soft -porn and graphic violence is bad... But a "virtual" gay couple being played by a straight couple in real life? WOW!!! Incredibly sad...

This country is MESSED UP!!! Violence is considered ok and for the most part acceptable? and someones sexual choice is not? (in a VIRUTAL setting no less)

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: This is funny and Sad at the same time...
[info]bustermanzero
2006-02-04 07:07 am UTC (link)
Games with marriage included, MMO and otherwise (Fable springs to mind), tend to get nailed on issues regarding homosexuality. Its all good and fun until someone complains...

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Damned if you do....
[info]stormewolfe
2006-02-03 10:40 pm UTC (link)
Looks to me that Blizz was trying to cover it's ass, and maybe jumped the gun and started a controversy by trying to head one off at the pass.

Really, it's a shame the majority of people seem to be so thin-skinned period. Everythign has to turn into a legal matter these days because someone's feelings got hurt.

(Reply to this)


[info]hexrei
2006-02-03 10:46 pm UTC (link)
"How advertising a "GLBT friendly" guild is "insulting" is something that Blizzard did not make clear to Sarah Andrews."

I think many GLBT folks might take offense at a clan that advertised itself "straight friendly".

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]evilrockstu
2006-02-04 04:40 am UTC (link)
Not the point. Majorities always have the benefit of being... well... majorities. Innocent until proven guilty, hetrosexual until proven homosexual, etc.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]hexrei, 2006-02-04 07:51 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bustermanzero, 2006-02-04 07:10 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]infinitevoid, 2006-02-04 05:25 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]hexrei, 2006-02-04 07:53 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bustermanzero, 2006-02-05 07:35 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]aniki21, 2006-02-04 10:00 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ascian, 2006-02-06 08:52 pm UTC

(319 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Page 1 of 3
<<[1] [2] [3] >>

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…